Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 280 posts

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#251

Post by quadrangle »

bmcusick wrote: post #13

American courts should have a "Loser pays" rule, and stricter standards for determining what is a frivolous lawsuit warranting additional penalties for the filer. American jurisprudence has always favored making sure "everyone gets their day in Court" to the point where trolls and professional litigants are ruining things.

Besides what others said, "loser pays" gives incentive to increase total legal costs where people who think they have a strong case where the other will pay could spend absurdly on the suit. And it reinforces sunk cost too. Once you're into the case, you better do everything it takes to win at all costs (since you won't face the burden of any of those costs if you do win).

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#252

Post by bostond »

kuschku wrote: post #38
blhack wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The fact there is a high barrier of entry might be one of the only appeals golf has at all? This is ridiculous. Golf is a sport that you can play from when you first start walking, until nearly the day you die. That's the appeal. It requires extreme concentration in a way that I've never experienced in any other sport I've ever played. I would highly, highly recommend that people learn to play golf. I wish it didn't…

> This is ridiculous. Golf is a sport that you can play from when you first start walking, until nearly the day you die. You’ve never considered that Golf has an actual price to it, while most poorer kids just play soccer with a single leather ball on the street, costing less than a dollar for dozens of kids?

No doubt that greens fees are certainly a barrier. The muni near me [1] (bordering the Boston city limit) charges $10 for a junior, which equates to about $2 an hour given the pace of play on a busy golf course. While I understand that is still not free, it is an very low barrier to entry.

Old clubs are very easy to come by (relatives, craisglist, loaners). The main thing that I feel is being overlooked on this thread is that balls can be had for free, given the child puts a small amount of time in to look for them. Walk along the tree line of any fairway in the world and it will not be long before you've found enough balls to fill your front pockets.

[1] http://www.presidentsgc.com/aboutus/rates/

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#253

Post by Para2016 »

PatentTroll wrote: post #191
ballenf wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From personal experience defending such suits, the bar is effectively so low to be imperceptibly higher than ground level. In the rare case it would be relevant, it's just as expensive or moreso to make that claim as defend the underlying case. In this case, based on just reading the article alone, it would be a very hard claim to make against Acushnet. Even if the patents could be invalidated, until they are they ha…

This. The standards of vexatious litgtation are quite high, as they out to be. Otherwise every defendant would cry tort, and legitimately harmed parties would be dissuaded from using the legal system.

I'm kind of surprised there is someone defending American patent law - but then I saw your username.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#254

Post by hkmurakami »

Declanomous wrote: post #184
ChrisBland wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Avid golfer here, while I agree with your premise on the threat to Titleist that KSIGS present. I went out and played 4-5 rounds with the Kirkland Signature and it couldn't hold a candle to the tournament balls I normally play. For a competitive golfer, the ball just is not up to par. For your weekend warrior, its a perfectly fine ball and probably better than the prov1(x) as the cover is much harder and won't wear o…

As a perpetually novice golfer, I'm flattered that you think I can keep track of golf balls long enough for the durability to matter. Plus I have yet to find a ball that will survive an encounter with a cart path, unless you fancy hitting range balls.

Wedges >> Cart path in terms of scuffing the ball imo ;)

GP, remember the days of playing Professional 90/100 balls? I sometimes miss playing balata balls but definitely don't miss the scuffing!

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#255

Post by Skylled »

I'm sorry, but shouldn't it be the responsibility of the party making the claim to provide evidence of patent infringement before the defendant is ever even affected?

What a sad state of affairs our court system is in if even a known false lawsuit can be devastating.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#257

Post by astrodust »

intrasight wrote: post #61
astrodust wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Loser pays makes filing these absurd cases a lot more expensive. If it's destined to lose and it's guaranteed to be paid, finding a lawyer is going to take it on is going to be really easy.

I think you mean to say "plaintiff loser pays". If the defendant loses, they shouldn't pay. Only then would finding a lawyer get easy.

Nope. Loser pays. This is the English system and it's generally up to the court to decide if this is the case, and if so, what amount is appropriate.

Example: http://www.sotosllp.com/2016/01/litigation-costs-in-ontario-...

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#258

Post by the_cat_kittles »

BoysenberryPi wrote: post #75
BEEdwards wrote: post #59

> It is a legitimate tactic; even those who succumb to it don’t really begrudge the approach. Maybe I just haven't given up yet, but what the f*ck? This is not a legitimate tactic, this is LITERALLY everything wrong with our present system.

She isn't wrong about it being a legitimate tactic. You might not like it, it might make you a piece of shit for doing it, but it is a completely legitimate tactic.

legitimate, to my mind, connotes at least some moral rightness. so i disagree. maybe the literal definition is "legal", but i think it would be more clear to say "legal" than "legitimate"

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#259

Post by [deleted] »

bostond wrote: post #252
kuschku wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is ridiculous. Golf is a sport that you can play from when you first start walking, until nearly the day you die. You’ve never considered that Golf has an actual price to it, while most poorer kids just play soccer with a single leather ball on the street, costing less than a dollar for dozens of kids?

No doubt that greens fees are certainly a barrier. The muni near me [1] (bordering the Boston city limit) charges $10 for a junior, which equates to about $2 an hour given the pace of play on a busy golf course. While I understand that is still not free, it is an very low barrier to entry. Old clubs are very easy to come by (relatives, craisglist, loaners). The main thing that I feel is being overlooked on this threa…

[deleted]

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#260

Post by fezz »

thefalcon wrote: post #225
tehlike wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me this sounds like a double edged sword. Though, i do like costco personally and shop there frequently.

Having sold to CostCo before, I can attest that it forces inefficiencies out of the process very quickly. And they will not accept an inferior product, either. Also they have efficiency built into every aspect of their business, down to the specific layout of the shipping crates to be sent, to minimize worker labor for setup and display of product. I don't see where the other (bad) edge of the sword is.

Their food products always seem subpar at times. Not all but often enough that I don't shop for food there anymore.
Post reply on HN